Sunday, 2 October 2016

language design - Why are there two assignment operators, `` in R?



I know how to use <- and ->, and there are several writeups on the difference between equals assignment & arrow assignment, but I don't know when to prefer -> over <-.




It seems the community has coalesced around using <- for assignment.



Neither the google R style-guide, nor Hadley Wickam's tidyverse R style-guide even mention -> in the assignment section.



I'm curious about the design considerations that led the S/S-PLUS developers to put in the right arrow assign operator ->. In what setting(s) would using -> be considered more readable (or easier to type) versus <- or =?



I'm not familiar with any other language that allows the right-assignment semantics. What languages inspired R in this regard?



I'm looking for answers that cite books / early design documents / user manuals / archived mailing lists or other references to establish what the S author/designer's intent was in putting in the forward-arrow assignment operator.



Answer



From the answer to an exercise in The New S Language (Becker, Chambers and Wilks 1988), via Google Books:




When you type a long expression only to remember at the end that it would be a good idea to save the result, a right-hand arrow allows you to perform an assignment without retyping the line.




This suggests that S users were working directly in the console, without line-editing capabilities that are available in most modern REPL/interactive environments ...







Some archaeology: I poked around in foundational sources on Google Books. There are three relevant books:




  • the Brown Book: S: An Interactive Environment for Data Analysis and Graphics R. A. Becker, J. M. Chambers (CRC Press, 1984)

  • Extending the S System, Becker and Chambers (Taylor & Francis, 1985)

  • the Blue Book: The New S Language Becker, Chambers and Wilks (Wadsworth and Brooks/Cole 1988, but reissued in 2018!! by CRC Press)




    1. The Brown Book doesn't mention -> in the main text:





enter image description here



but it does in the appendix:



enter image description here





  1. Extending the S System mentions -> in the main text:



enter image description here



I can't search very much of the book, so -> might also be mentioned in the appendix somewhere.




  1. The Blue Book refers to the right-arrow, but actually seems to have a typo:




enter image description here



I interpret the underlined red passages as supporting that there's a typo in the first underlined line, which should be -> rather than ← ...



Here's the screenshot of the exercise answer referred to above:



enter image description here



If you want a copy of the 1985 book you can get it for $34.41 - or $1070.99 (but with free shipping!) ...




enter image description here


No comments:

Post a Comment

c++ - Does curly brackets matter for empty constructor?

Those brackets declare an empty, inline constructor. In that case, with them, the constructor does exist, it merely does nothing more than t...